Administrative Services

EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

LINK website

Arbitration Decision Summary

The following Arbitration Decisions regarding employee grievances have been summarized for informational use only. Please be advised that none of the decisions in any of these cases are precedent setting.

2006-07

Doug Samuelson v. Office of the Capitol Commission #1:  (NAPE)  Doug Samuelson filed a grievance after he was placed on six-months probation and was suspended without pay for one day.  The parties agreed to designate William Morris as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2005-2007 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  The Respondent claimed that the Appellant violated the rules of his job as a tour guide.

The Arbitrator found that the behaviors of the Appellant did in fact violate the Labor Contract, in that he failed to comply with the legally promulgated, published rules and regulations of the Department of Administrative Services. The Arbitrator found that the discipline imposed by the Capitol Commission was appropriate and proportional, was imposed with good faith and for just cause, and should stand as imposed.

Michelle Donovan v. Department of Correctional Services:  (NAPE)  Michelle Donovan filed a grievance after being placed on probation.  The parties mutually agreed to appoint C. Thomas White as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2005-2007 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  The Respondent had suspected sick leave abuse and had asked the Appellant to meet goals set in order to decrease the amount of sick leave used.  The Appellant claimed that the use of sick leave is a right given to the employees covered under the NAPE contract and reasonable requests for leave cannot be denied.

The Arbitrator found that there was no abuse of sick leave by the Appellant and that the Department was ordered to set aside the probation and that all references to the discipline should be removed from the Appellant’s file.

Lance Meier v. Nebraska Department of Military:  (NAPE)  Lance Meier filed a grievance after he was not granted a job as a Crew Chief.  The parties agreed to appoint C. Thomas White as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2005-2007 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  The Respondent alleges that they conducted all interviews for the three Crew Chief positions in a fair and just manner.

The Arbitrator found no overt violations of the union contract, and therefore denied the grievance.

Geoffery Davis v. Department of Correctional Services:  (NAPE)  Geoffrey Davis filed a grievance after the department terminated his employment.  The parties agreed to designate C. Thomas White as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2005-2007 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  The Respondent alleges that the Appellant was incompetent and demonstrated gross negligence after he refused an inmate permission to leave the kitchen area to use the restroom.  The Appellant denies this, saying that he was following procedure, and he was not the one with the authority to allow the inmate to leave the area.

The Arbitrator found that the Appellant did not violate a rule and did not have the authority to allow the inmate to leave the kitchen area.  Thus, the charges against the Appellant have no merit and the Appellant should be reinstated.

Doug Samuelson v. Office of the Capitol Commission #4:  (NAPE)  Doug Samuelson filed  a grievance after he was discharged.  The parties agreed to appoint C. Thomas White as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the NAPE/AFSCME 2005-2007 and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  At the time of discharge, the Appellant was on probation, and allegedly did not notify the Director of the Commission of a sudden illness and subsequent Sunday absence.  The Appellant claimed that he left a message on the Director’s answering machine.

The Arbitrator found that the Appellant repeatedly violated the rules of the agency and that his conduct justified the termination.

Laurie Hultgren v. Department of Health and Human Services:  (NAPE)  Laurie Hultgren filed a grievance after she was disciplined with a written warning.  The parties mutually agreed to designate William Morris as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2005-2007 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract. The Respondent claimed that the Appellant displayed inappropriate, unprofessional and potentially violent behavior towards a public defender in a Douglas County courtroom.  The Appellant claimed that due to the cramped quarters in the courtroom, she accidentally bumped into the public defender.

The Arbitrator found that the discipline of the Appellant was for just cause, fair and reasonable and in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement.  He found that the grievance should be denied and the matter be dismissed.

Jim Fry v. Department of Roads:  (NAPE)  Jim Fry filed a grievance after he received an updated winter operations leave policy stating that leave will be approved/disapproved based upon forecasted weather conditions and that vacation leave will not be approved more than one week at a time.  The parties agreed to appoint William Morris as Arbitrator, and a hearing was held in accordance with the NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.  The Respondent claimed that this new policy falls well within management rights.

The Arbitrator found that the winter operations policy does not violate the labor agreement, and that the grievance should be dismissed.

Roseann L’Heureux v. HHS (NAPE) Roseann L’Heureux filed a grievance after she was terminated from her employment.  The Respondent alleges that the Appellant demonstrated poor performance and often delayed responses to supervisory orders.  The parties agreed to designate C. Thomas White as Arbitrator and a hearing was held in accordance with the 2007-2009 NAPE/AFSCME and State of Nebraska Labor Contract.

The Arbitrator found that the Appellant had been previously disciplined for similar behavior and that the Respondent was justified in terminating her employment.